High Court Kerala High Court

S.Girija vs The General Manager on 4 April, 2008

Kerala High Court
S.Girija vs The General Manager on 4 April, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 3117 of 2008(U)


1. S.GIRIJA, W/O.LATE V.SASIDHARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE GENERAL MANAGER, ALLAHABAD BANK,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER,

3. THE BRANCH MANAGER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.JACOB VARGHESE

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :04/04/2008

 O R D E R
                         ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
             ------------------------------------
                        W.P.(C) 3117 of 2008
             -------------------------------------
                        Dated: APRIL 4, 2008

                               JUDGMENT

Petitioner, a defaulter to the bank, is facing proceedings under

the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and

Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The writ petition has

been filed praying for permitting to settle the liability by accepting

the offer that has been made. There is a further prayer to release

the documents.

2. From the counter affidavit filed it is disclosed that the

petitioner is also a guarantor to another loan in respect of which

more than Rs.13 lakhs is due to the bank. On account of this, the

bank states its unwillingness to release the documents as sought for

by the petitioner.

3. At that stage, pleading ignorance of the loan transaction

mentioned by the bank in respect of which the aforesaid liability has

accrued, petitioner has filed Ext.P3 representation before the bank

seeking disclosure of certain information. It is now submitted that

WP(C) 3117/08
Page numbers

the bank may be asked to pass orders on the representation so

made.

4. I heard the standing counsel appearing for the bank which

reiterates the plea in the counter affidavit filed.

5. Taking into account the controversy that is prevailing

between the parties, I think it is only reasonable that the bank itself

orders on Ext.P3.

With this direction the writ petition is closed.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

mt/-